Climate justice and environmental racism: Emissions, impacts, and global inequality

Global climate change reflects inequality between historical emissions responsibility and climate impact, raising questions about climate justice and global environmental racism, which is characterised by unequal exposure of vulnerable populations to environmental risks. No systematic classification framework capturing historical emissions responsibility, climate impacts, and development capacity exists. This study addresses this gap by proposing and validating a 3 × 2 emissions–impacts classification of 172 countries to identify the country groups facing the greatest mismatch between responsibility and vulnerability, test links to lower human development, and derive implications for global climate governance. Historical responsibility is measured by cumulative CO₂ emissions (1750–2023) grouped A/B/C by the modified Pareto rule 80–15–5, while impacts are measured by the Global Climate Risk Index (GCRI, 1993–2022) and divided binarily into high and low using a value-weighted 80/20 threshold. The Human Development Index (HDI, 2023) serves as an interpretative indicator of adaptive capacity. Results confirm a persistent asymmetry: 55 C-High countries with minimal responsibility and highest impacts show the lowest HDI scores, while 7 largest-emitters (A-Low group) and 22 medium-emitters (B-Low group) combine higher historical responsibility with low impacts. HDI differences are significant (C-High vs. A+B: p < 0.001, r = 0.526), and the model is stable across seven threshold specifications. The findings support targeting Loss and Damage Fund resources at disadvantaged countries, directing mitigation obligations towards high-responsibility economies, and moving climate policy beyond the growth paradigm towards postgrowth alternatives.